Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Work history is completely irrelevant to the likelihood of someone paying their rent. They might work their tails off, but if they don't pay their bills, it doesn't matter at all.
I'm referring to government assistance programs not to unsubsidized private rentals. Government currently subsidizes sloth.
e.g. I have a co-worker living in subsidized housing, he works only two days a week. A newspaper article several years ago describes a young hipster who lives in a subsidized rental, he also works part-time in order to keep his housing subsidy. Government is subsidizing the wrong things.
One might ponder the example of Federally funded housing projects from the 1960s-70s "War on Poverty."
These were low rent / subsidized housing.
And they were generally destroyed by their occupants within a relatively short span of time.
What would you do differently, to prevent such a waste of resources?
That subsidized housing was for years a perfectly good place to live because existing MINIMUM INCOME requirements kept out the welfare class.
Then a 'welfare rights' movement got Congress in 1969 to eliminate these minimum income requirements, opening the door to the welfare class, and that's when it all went downhill.
All I can say is I'm very grateful for that subsidized housing, because otherwise I would still be in my car. And I do not consider myself "welfare class", whatever that is. If I could work, you better believe I would be working. I've worked full time since I was 17 while supporting myself and I'm going to retire in 4 years. But I don't know an employer on earth who will hire someone who has to lie down for fifteen minutes every hour to take the pressure, and therefore the pain, off his back.
All I can say is I'm very grateful for that subsidized housing, because otherwise I would still be in my car. And I do not consider myself "welfare class", whatever that is. If I could work, you better believe I would be working. I've worked full time since I was 17 while supporting myself and I'm going to retire in 4 years. But I don't know an employer on earth who will hire someone who has to lie down for fifteen minutes every hour to take the pressure, and therefore the pain, off his back.
Most people in subsidized housing are not welfare class; it's just that the welfare class (and primarily their baby daddy boyfriends who were not authorized to live there) trashed public housing as soon as they were let in.
A lot of you people disgust me. I'm formerly homeless and labeled with the "mental illness" of schizophrenia, but guess what? I don't fit any of the above archetypes.
First of all, I didn't become homeless by bad choices. Family was dysfunctional and mom kicked me out after I became an adult legally but before I was ready to be in the world by myself. I was working and trying to get into school at the time, but when I hit the street I found that I didn't know how to make it on my own. Nobody was there to teach me s***. My situation was prolonged by trying to figure out how to become an self-reliant adult without any guidance, and as someone here already said, the longer anyone is in the street, the more afflicted and "swallowed up" by street they become.
I was more than willing to work any kind of job and climb up the food chain, but guess what? No matter my work ethic, I fell through the cracks anyway. Was it because I'm lazy or have some unrelenting mental disease? No! It was because most human relationships are based on a power differential, and I refuse to be on the short end of the stick. It has to do with who I am as a person - I just can't deal with the idea of being subject to other peoples control.
-This means it's hard for me to work for anyone but myself. I don't have a regular job because I can't deal with the power trip of a**hole supervisors, workplace politics etc. Even the initial hiring process has always been a huge psychological barrier for me. I'm a workhorse, too. I can do the work itself, I just can't deal with the people.
-This means I could never persist as a "mental health" consumer. Been there, done that. The psychiatric establishment is a paternalistic sham, and as someone already alluded to in this thread, the system is set up to infantilize and disempower people by turning them into helpless children. It's nothing but a bunch of lying quack doctors and social worker minions getting paid to manipulate people and warehouse them into unsolicited "treatment" programs using unfalsifiable LABELS, mischaracterized as medical diagnoses. All the "medication" does is mask the persons underlying problem. All the "diagnosis" does is stereotype the individual and slot them into a convenient and highly stigmatizing box. Count me out.
-This means I can't rely on anyone but myself. Panhandling? Never! I only relied on social services by coercion (shelters in my city require clients to apply for public assistance if not working, so if I lost my job and SRO while living check to check, I pretty much had to apply to keep my bed). I don't even like asking people for directions or what time it is.
I don't rely on government programs of any kind anymore. I'm self-housed and self-employed with an online business. I found this to be a happy solution for my non-social personality conflicts and quirks. I just had to develop a marketable skill that I could profit from that doesn't require a ton of direct face-to-face interaction with people. I'll gradually build interpersonal skills over time, just a long as the power differential in my relationships with different people is either neutral or tilted my way. The idea of having to be someone's wage slave OR be institutionalized with no alternative is complete lunacy.
As far as all these hollow pejoratives being thrown around - "bum", "crazy" etc. - SMH. It's OK, I'm just glad I'm strong-minded enough to depend on self emotionally and financially, and care not what a bunch of privileged b*****ds that don't know my situation think about me. F 'em all.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,243,006 times
Reputation: 57825
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
All I can say is I'm very grateful for that subsidized housing, because otherwise I would still be in my car. And I do not consider myself "welfare class", whatever that is. If I could work, you better believe I would be working. I've worked full time since I was 17 while supporting myself and I'm going to retire in 4 years. But I don't know an employer on earth who will hire someone who has to lie down for fifteen minutes every hour to take the pressure, and therefore the pain, off his back.
Social Security and state disability benefits are for that kind of situation, and are not welfare.
I have no problem with subsidized housing. I think it's probably preferable to have a Housing Authority as your landlord than some developer/real estate tycoon. Maybe the OP didn't know such housing already exists in most communities.
One might ponder the example of Federally funded housing projects from the 1960s-70s "War on Poverty."
These were low rent / subsidized housing.
And they were generally destroyed by their occupants within a relatively short span of time.
What would you do differently, to prevent such a waste of resources?
Subbsidized hhousing was fine until 1969 when Congress gave in to pressure from 'welfare rights' activists and got rid of the MINIMUM income requirements that had kept out the welfare class and the underclass.
The welfare class also brought in their baby daddies who were not authorized to live there, compounding whatever problems the authorized residents were causing.
Obviously, restoring the MINIMUM income requirements and enforcing terms of occupancy would go a long way toward fixing the problems there.
Subbsidized hhousing was fine until 1969 when Congress gave in to pressure from 'welfare rights' activists and got rid of the MINIMUM income requirements that had kept out the welfare class and the underclass.
The welfare class also brought in their baby daddies who were not authorized to live there, compounding whatever problems the authorized residents were causing.
Obviously, restoring the MINIMUM income requirements and enforcing terms of occupancy would go a long way toward fixing the problems there.
This is the second time you've posted this, and have been wrong twice.
Minimum rents have been a feature of assisted housing (with the lone exception of USHA low-rent public housing, which has been disappearing for decades) for years. I don't know what this "welfare class" you're speaking of is, but even families on public assistance have to pay something for their rent, as well as utilities.
Most people in subsidized housing are not welfare class; it's just that the welfare class (and primarily their baby daddy boyfriends who were not authorized to live there) trashed public housing as soon as they were let in.
Everybody in subsidized housing is by definition welfare class. If you're receiving welfare benefits, you're welfare class.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
